Speaking of suspensions that should be (but won't), that high stick on Luongo by Jordan Caron was 100% deliberate and should be suspendible for a game. There was no stick there he could have been trying to lift. Its only Stanton's hit that drew everyone's attention away from the net otherwise it certainly would have been called.

Neal, a repeat offender, only gets 5 games for deliberately kneeing a downed player in the head.

Orpik's hit was late and dirty. No way Eriksson was receiving that pass.

The Penguins instigated the entire situation and get away with a 5 game suspension.

Orpik was pussing out, besides, he should have been in the penalty box when that scrum ensued.

This wasn't as bad as Bertuzzi because it wasn't blindsided. It was dirty, no question, but not quite the same.

While I think 15 games is fine, and maybe lenient considering the comparisson to Bertuzzi's suspension, I think that Neal should have gotten at least 10 games, and Orpik should have gotten a couple of games.

What bullshit. Bert wasn't trying to hurt Moore. He was tugging on his jersey to get him to turn around and fight. Moore skated away like a coward. His injury was an accident. Thornton on the other hand slew footed an unsuspecting Orpik and then punched when he was defenceless on the ice resulting in a concussion. If you ask Bert he never intended to hurt Moore he wanted to fight him (OK, hurt him with fists). Thornton's intention and his actions as targeting attack on a player that had no chance to respond.

15 games for that?

Joke.

Bert's suspension was supposed to be a bench mark. No more goonery or player retribution on ice.

Spidey, I can't tell if you are just trying to stir shit up here or not.....

Looking at both plays I will retract my previous comment and say that they are equally bad.

Bertuzzi's attack on Moore was totally blindside and from behind. His initial intent was to fight Moore, Moore declined. Moore didn't answer the bell in the first game after he hit Naslund, and so this was definitely not a case of just a quick reaction to an event. I still maintain that the injuries that Moore sustained were the result of the dog pile of his Avalanche teammates as they came to his "rescue". I also don't think that Bertuzzi's punch knocked Moore out, I think Moore took a dive was further injured by going head first into the ice. No doubt about the injuries sustained during the pile up.

Thornton's attack on Orpik was just as bad, and it is the same story, a late, and dirty hit, on a skilled forward, and the guy who threw it chickens out and won't answer the bell. If Orpik had just stood in and thrown a few with Thornton initially then none of this happens. Thornton's take down is pretty brutal because it hauls Orpik down hard and backwards, but the punch thrown wasn't a full wind up, and I just don't see a guy being knocked out by that punch, likely winded by the impact with the ice. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if in this case the trainers told him to stay down not wake up. I think that someone who is knocked out like that is going to be kept over night for observation and not released to travel with the team.....just saying, although if Spock was around he might be a better source for that opinion.

I've seen some very conscious people in my line of work who didn't drop like Moore did that after being sucker punched bare knuckled or hit with a bat. Same for Orpik, guys that have been taken down from behind and had the shit kicked out of them, their faces a mess, and they didn't lose consciousness.

I just can't get over the fact that Neal only gets 5 games for what, IMO, is an equally dirty move. Some would argue that you can't totally judge Neal's intent, but I think it's more than clear when a guy extends and braces his knee before contact, also, most players who run into a downed player unexpectedly end up going A over T themselves.

Shit disturb? wth? What Thornton (and Mcsorley) did was waaaaaay worse than Berts. Pure and simple.If you judge it by intent.Outcome is obviously not but there has been no conclusive evidence that Bert broke Moore's neck....his actions only led to it...Thornton is a goon. Maybe he will learn from this, maybe not. Time will tell if 15 is a deterrent for him (it is not for the rest of the league). Todd certainly learned from his suspension.

There is no such thing as climate change...there is no such thing as climate change...there is such thing as climate change...

Arachnid wrote:Shit disturb? wth? What Thornton (and Mcsorley) did was waaaaaay worse than Berts. Pure and simple.If you judge it by intent.Outcome is obviously not but there has been no conclusive evidence that Bert broke Moore's neck....his actions only led to it...Thornton is a goon. Maybe he will learn from this, maybe not. Time will tell if 15 is a deterrent for him (it is not for the rest of the league). Todd certainly learned from his suspension.

This is a matter of what philosophy you subscribe to. Some judge by outcome, some by action and others by intent.

You and I both find intent to be the main thing to consider. Others say screw intent, how can you ever know what anyone else intends? Judge by outcome! And others take the middle road and judge by action.

If you judge by (assumed) intent, it would definitely look like Thornton's act was worse. By first slew footing and then hammering away at the face on a player lying down, it certainly looks like there must be intent to injure. In Bertuzzi's case it looks more like the intent is to inflict pain.

If you judge by action, the verdict should probably be similar to the above in this case, but perhaps they end up somewhat closer on the badness scale.

If you however judge by outcome, Moore's fractured neck makes Bertuzzi's act far worse. I've not yet heard about how Orpik has fared, I guess he may have been concussed? Still, Big Bad Bert "wins" by a hair fracture.

I guess there is no objective truth here. Unless we can agree on which philosophy to subscribe to, there is no way we can agree on which act was worse.

Thornton is appealing, which should be interesting, if for no other reason then to see Bettman's official write up (if it's leaked). What would be more interesting is if Thornton appeals it a second time and it goes to an independent arbitrator, which can happen under the new CBA. I don't believe a player has utilized this option yet.

BurningBeard wrote:Thornton is appealing, which should be interesting, if for no other reason then to see Bettman's official write up (if it's leaked). What would be more interesting is if Thornton appeals it a second time and it goes to an independent arbitrator, which can happen under the new CBA. I don't believe a player has utilized this option yet.

I believe they released the last one. Probably a calculated attempt to bluff the PA out of seeking a third party ruling as it was extensive and even handed (IMO).

What da fuck mon, he said he felt bad for his actions and a lot of people said 15 games was apt for a first time offender (myself, not one of them)....take it like a man you coward! You did something very wrong.

Interesting from the article that the NHLPA is technically in a conflict of interest here...

There is no such thing as climate change...there is no such thing as climate change...there is such thing as climate change...

BurningBeard wrote:Thornton is appealing, which should be interesting, if for no other reason then to see Bettman's official write up (if it's leaked). What would be more interesting is if Thornton appeals it a second time and it goes to an independent arbitrator, which can happen under the new CBA. I don't believe a player has utilized this option yet.

I believe they released the last one. Probably a calculated attempt to bluff the PA out of seeking a third party ruling as it was extensive and even handed (IMO).

That's a good point. I'm extremely curious to see what an independent arbitrator would say about any NHL suspension, since that measuring stick has never been used. The ability for an independent arbitrator to increase the suspension is also a tantalizing scenario.

I wonder if an arbitrator would comment on the lack of concrete guidelines around the offensive itself and outcome (injury) in correlation to the number of games the suspension is for.

Last edited by BurningBeard on Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

What da fuck mon, he said he felt bad for his actions and a lot of people said 15 games was apt for a first time offender (myself, not one of them)....take it like a man you coward! You did something very wrong.

Interesting from the article that the NHLPA is technically in a conflict of interest here...

I find it the PA rather consistent in how it always sticks up for the players being suspended and NEVER backs the injured players.